1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

Weapon Pack be or not to be ?

Discussion in 'General Infiltration Discussion' started by -=ViC=-, Apr 4, 2006.

  1. -=ViC=-

    -=ViC=- New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well I'm new to INF world and seems to stay for good :] but one thing that's bother me is INFMODTEAM product :/ well they do really great job at those models and etc. but WP destroy one of the most beautiful things in original INF weapon balance and it's attachments. I know that if I dosen't like it I don't have to instal it but I wish to know your opinion about it, wouldn.t be better if they start making old models looks better and adding new attachmnets then creating new ones ?
    btw. hi all :)
     
  2. AlmostAlive

    AlmostAlive Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Welcome.

    You have to remember that these guys are doing the things they do in their spare time, not getting anything in return except for the satisfaction of creating something for themselves and others to enjoy. Also, the fact that Infiltration is based on a game from 1999 does limit what you can do in terms of looks.

    All in all, I'm pretty damn impressed what they have accomplished with the tools available. What the weapons do in terms of ingame balance is a whole different debate.
     
  3. Keganator

    Keganator White as Snow Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2001
    Messages:
    5,262
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aside from the reasons Almost layed out, changing the official weapons would be very difficult, since they don't have access to the original models, which (from what I understand) in some cases no longer exist.

    The weapon packs do bring new balance to the weapons, but they are interesting.
     
  4. Psychomorph

    Psychomorph  

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,267
    Likes Received:
    2
    I agree. I remember playing INF version 2.86. It was a buggy, but clean gaming. It felt like an Infantry game, now it is more an universal SpecOps combat.
     
  5. geogob

    geogob Koohii o nomimasu ka?

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2000
    Messages:
    4,148
    Likes Received:
    0
    Currently I am the lead developer for the INF ModTeam INF 2.9 projects, and this question is important to me. This is a very good question you ask, one that has been open for debate ever since 3rd party developers started creating new or modified content for Infiltration. One could say that this problem is not specifically related to Infiltration but to any game.

    When the INF ModTeam was created, the mandate we gave ourselves was to create new content for Infiltration, not update the existing content. With time this has proven to be a good choice for many reasons, but the most basic one is that we, the INF ModTeam, are not Sentry Studios, the developers of Infiltration.

    The idea of resurrecting Infiltration 2.9 and continue to updated it semi-officially (or even officially) was brought for before (by myself and others). This idea was rejected by the original authors of the modification and this I will respect. Furthermore, with time (and a few HD failures convoluted with lack of backups), a lot of the original Infiltration 2.9 project has been lost. Not having these original files imply redoing everything from zero (models, animation, textures and skins, and, to some extent, the code too). At this point, why not create new weapons instead? And this is why today we have the MP5A2, while the MP5/40A3 was already in game. Same goes with the M16A4 when the M16A2 was also already in game. Instead of updating existing weapons, we created new alternatives, giving more and/or different attachment options.

    Balance is a critical issue. I totally agree that some of the weapons made by the Infiltration ModTeam shifted the balance a little. With every updates, serious efforts are made to solve this. My personal philosophy is that weapons should not be balanced by artificial means like bulk and ridiculous recoil, but rather with their real disadvantages, like you would have to deal with them in real life. Of course, some balancing means like bulk already being implemented in Infiltration, we cannot eliminate it or change it to something more realistic and we have to deal with it as well as we can deal with it.

    But you have to keep in mind that not all weapon systems are effective in every condition. Not all weapon systems are as good as others. Companies built bad cars, so did they built bad guns.

    In short, the Infiltration ModTeam will not update any official Infiltration weapon or their attachments or create new attachments for them. On the other hand we will continue to create new weapons as alternative to original Infiltration weapons, to create new weapons that bring a whole new dimension to the game and to update our previous projects to improve them, fix their bugs and improve both their balance and realism.

    --

    And welcome to the Infiltration forums ;)

    --

    This is a problem when the development loses focus. I do think it lost focus. We all lost focus the day Infiltration 2.9 came out with partially developed maps and gametypes and with a gametype that is NOT infiltration. We also lost focus the day official development ceased. Or I would rather say, the focus changed as the development teams changed.

    To bring a game closer to infantry simulation, it needs strict set of rules and operation procedures. Americas Army is much closer then this, with its strict squad and weapon assignment structure. With the too flexible loadout system of Infiltration, a more realistic infantry structure would be difficult. This without speaking that some original weapons where totally of focus to start with.

    I hope I’m going a little far here in saying what the focus of Infiltration development was and why it was lost :p


    EDIT: few corrections. Long posts are a plague.
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2006
  6. Psychomorph

    Psychomorph  

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,267
    Likes Received:
    2
    @-=ViC=-:
    BTW, welcome.


    Completely agreed on every point.


    The predefined weapon selection is what I always was asking for, but I know only few would like to play that way.

    I had this few times, where one side agreed in using the M16 type weapons (M16A2, M4A1, M249SAW) and the other had AK types (AKM, AKMSU, LMG AKM) and it was a blast playing.

    Few weeks ago, when the NVG's were released, I played on the French Reviera server the map MONWfix with the night mutator.
    Snipers were less effective and everybody agreed on not using the OICW and the game was a blast.
    You saw tracer of the M249SAW's flying, I had the HK416 on semi. Hell I even didn't check the cammos, because I knew where the enemy lines were.
    Man, it looked and felt like one of the Iraq reports with footage that you saw on TV.
    That was the best INF and DTAS in month's, sadly noone wants to play NV matches any longer (my frag rate increased with NVG's intensively, btw :p).

    Few days ago I played with Clutch and some other people. I asked if we can play some "semi auto rifle" matches, they agreed. And dude, that was the best INF TDM in years. The leak of sprayage forced us to stick more together and to move more slow paced.
    Because of the weaker 5.56 (M16A2) I used the real fast tapping.
    Hell I even performed some two shots to chest and one to head more often. One time I saw one round going to the left shoulder, another to the chest, the last to the head, because the head recoiled back and blood sprayed on the wall and the guy fell to the ground.
    That was intensive. Usually that doesn't work in INF, because running and spraying, even from hip is often more effective. You have to be faster, which doesn't work due to small lag.
    The semi auto match was a pure combat thing.


    That all of course was on the game settings side, the core is when people agree to play more tactical, or intelligent.

    Both, settings and gamer behavior would be the ideal for INF. But except few matches, where all agree on it, it wont happen in INF to much. Sad, because that makes INF more interessting.
    I remember even where I asked for some settings few weeks ago (if the players would agree), I was flamed badly.
     
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2006
  7. geogob

    geogob Koohii o nomimasu ka?

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2000
    Messages:
    4,148
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't worry about the OICW. It will be different in the next release.
     
  8. -Freshmeat

    -Freshmeat Eternally noob

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think it should be possible to increase the use of semiautomatic fire be increasing recoil and damage values. A higher (random?) damage would make sure that people who were hit went down. I recall a discussion where Tiffy stated that a hit from a 5.56mm would incapacitate a person within a mile or so.

    On the recoil, I think that the fact that recoil starts before the bullet leaves the barrel is an unmodelled fact. This effect is more pronounced the heavier the bullet and amount of gunpowder is. It might be worth experimenting with some of the recoil needing to be counterbalanced with the mouse already is the button is pressed. I do not shoot myself, but it would be worth hearing the opinion of people who actually shoot a lot, preferably with different weapons.

    Further, the current weapons makes players select weapons that are not realistic to their skills: Due to my extreme lack of skills I tend to use the M14. If I am lucky enough to land a hit, I need to be certain that the enemy goes down. However, as a unskilled combatant I should tend to favor an assault rifle due to better controllability, while a battle rifle should be the tool of a player who had the time to learn to control the recoil.

    Totally OT:
    Geogob, your new sig is almost as good as the bonzai kitten :tup:

    -Freshmeat
     
  9. Psychomorph

    Psychomorph  

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,267
    Likes Received:
    2
    I have read often, that the NATO 5.56x45mm is more weak on closer distances, but achieves greater penetration on distance (source 11th paragraph).
     
  10. geogob

    geogob Koohii o nomimasu ka?

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2000
    Messages:
    4,148
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well that would make sens. At short range, there is little fragmentation if I recal correctly and less bullet tumbling inside the body due to higher speed and its form factor. This would result in smaller cavities and less internal damage.
     
  11. -Freshmeat

    -Freshmeat Eternally noob

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    The article writes about penetration:
    I would think that the 5,56mm would be extremely damaging at short ranges against unprotected targets, creating a large hole by yawing and breaking up. Against a body armor, it might of course be very different, and probably hideously difficult to represent in the game.

    -Freshmeat
     
  12. Psychomorph

    Psychomorph  

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,267
    Likes Received:
    2
    From what I know the fragmentation causes a nasty, but less lethal wounding. Also the fragmentated projectile parts stop pretty soon, which reduces the actual penetration process.
    Some might know the imfamous "better a wounded soldier with two another helping him, instead of a dead soldier and the two other keep fighting, because they can't do anything" philosophy of the 5.56x45mm.

    The russian 7N10 round (5.45x39mm) has different ballistics there. It has a massive slug in the softer projectile, if it hits soft tissue, the slug moves forward due to the kinetical forces and causes the projectile to turn its axis and causing huge and nasty wounds. If the projectile hits armor, the projectile force is getting absorbed by the armor, but the slug uses the kinetic force to breach the armor (up to 16mm).

    So the russian round is more powerful in closer distances, but that doesn't always makes it more lethal of course.


    I see we go far off-topic here. Sorry at thread starter.
    To state my opinion, that's exactly what I always was saying from the beginning. I rather would like to see the exsiting stuff beeing reworked and visually improved. But the IMT doesn't have the "rights" to replace existant stuff, they can just add new stuff, which lead to the M16A4.

    On the other hand it is good that the old weapons remain, because I never liked the M16A4 on so many aspects and still prefer the original M16A2.

    Still I would wish to see all weapons beeing equal in quality, which is not the case in a "Originals vs. WP" comparison.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2006
  13. chuckus

    chuckus Can't stop the bum rush.

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2001
    Messages:
    771
    Likes Received:
    0
    I do'nt think they were referring to human targets when talking about penetration. I think they were talking about structural materials. That or really bad paragraph structure.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2006
  14. keihaswarrior

    keihaswarrior New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,376
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thats not true at all. The MORE speed a bullet has, the MORE it will fragment. Bullets have their most speed at short range obviously.

    The 5.56 round fragments well at ranges under 100m and 150m for the M4 and M16 respectively.

    There are some problems with the newer M855 'green tip' ammo. It usually does well, but its fragmentation can vary a lot from batch to batch. This can lead to unreliable fragmentation from M4 barrels at ranges as short as 20m sometimes.

    If the bullet doesn't fragment, it will give 'ice-pick' wounds to the target which aren't very incapacitating. LOT and lots of stories about soldiers engaging targets (particularly with the M4) at long range and having to shoot them many times before the target went down.

    Here is a good picture illustrating how bullets fragment more when they have more speed:
    [​IMG]
     
  15. geogob

    geogob Koohii o nomimasu ka?

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2000
    Messages:
    4,148
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, I just realise that I totally said the opposite. What i remembered really was that in one case it fragmented and in the other not. I'll be honnest, i did not really remember which case was which nor did I take the time to look through the notes I took while working on RT. But now that you post this picture (which I have in my archives too), my memory started working again... yeah.

    That's why I am not a consultant and i do the dirty work of coding :p
     
  16. -=ViC=-

    -=ViC=- New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Reading this forum I can say only one thing that INF community is most dedicated that I have ever seen ! It is nice that such people like u all guys share love for this beautiful game :) I don't blame SS for not continueing works on INF but wish to see whole new version :] and one more thing can u write your loadouts for INF w/o WP
    My skills are based on local matches with few friends but when the right time will come I will come with it for online
    See u all on battlefields
     
  17. -Freshmeat

    -Freshmeat Eternally noob

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, you can always use me for target practice. I am the one that looks around the corner to see where the gunfire came from :p

    -Freshmeat
     

Share This Page